ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2022
Super-Minimal Incision Technique in Pediatric Kidney Transplantation: A Paired Kidney Analysis.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Recently, the demand for minimally invasive techniques in kidney transplantation (MIKT) has increased. However, there is only a limited number of studies on MIKT, especially in pediatric kidney transplants. Hence, we evaluated whether there is a difference between the super-minimal incision technique in pediatric kidney transplantation (SMIPKT) and conventional kidney transplantation (CKT). Methods: Between December 2018 and November 2021, 34 patients who underwent pediatric kidney transplantation with a follow-up of 1 month were enrolled. A paired kidney analysis was performed to minimize donor variability and bias. The SMIPKT and CKT groups included 17 patients. Results: There was no difference in baseline clinical characteristics, including age, sex, the donor/ recipient weight ratio (DRWR), choice of dialysis modality, pretransplant dialysis time, BMI, renal artery number, cause of ESRD, DGF, length of the kidney and cold ischemic time, tacrolimus concentration at 3 and 7 days, serum creatinine at 1 month and postoperative complication rate between the SMIPKT and CKT groups (all Conclusion: Compared with CKT, our results indicated that SMIPKT showed more satisfactory cosmetic results, shorter SMIPKT operating time, and reduced intraoperative bleeding and postoperative drainage volume within 24 h. There were also no statistical differences in postoperative complications. Hence, we suggest that SMIPKT is an appropriate method for pediatric kidney transplantation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.